On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 20:18:58 -0500, Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com wrote:
I have a strong bias to admit. I can't stand the "In popular culture" heading that certain articles have, which which become a hodgepodge list for every time a major historical event or theme is mentioned in a TV show, movie, Japanese cartoon, video game, rock song, or science fiction novel.
I strongly agree with this and the rest of what you've entered here.
I don't feel that they are ALL bad or should always go, but they can, and are, overused. The rule of thumb to be used is "Is this fact notable enough to be in this article?" In the example of nuclear weapons, for example, listing every movie, book, or whatnot that ever mentioned one is clearly going beyond the bounds of notability. Listing examples of them that had SIGNIFICANT effect on the popular knowledge or opinion would be a different manner, and quite acceptable.
Meanwhile, in an article about something much more obscure, mentioning a cultural reference might be much more valuable, since it may be one of the few ways in which a member of the general public has heard of the topic. E.g. in the article on the [[Toyota 2000GT]], a rare 1960s Japanese sports car, the fact that one appeared in a James Bond movie may be quite relevant, since it's the only place that most of us are likely to have seen one.
In a sense, this is a special case of a meta-problem: trivia. The extent that Wikipedia articles should include trivia - and how this should be done - isn't properly defined.
-Matt (User:Morven)